Energy expenditure measured for various tillage practices for various speeds of operation at different depths of cut in two different soil types

Abhishek Kumar, V. S. Saimbhi, Jagjeet Singh
{"title":"Energy expenditure measured for various tillage practices for various speeds of operation at different depths of cut in two different soil types","authors":"Abhishek Kumar, V. S. Saimbhi, Jagjeet Singh","doi":"10.22271/TPI.2021.V10.I4D.5936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tillage involves a lot of energy expenditure, generally in terms of fuel consumed by the tractor. The fuel consumption for the different tillage practices needs to be quantified and this paper presents quantification for the same. The experiment was carried out at the fields of two different soil types viz. sandy loam (S1) and silty loam (S2). Six tillage practices, designated as P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P6, were undertaken in the present study. The six practices were one pass of harrow-cultivator-planker combination (P1), two passes of harrow-cultivator-planker combinations (P2), one pass of rotavator (P3), two passes of rotavator (P4), one pass of spading tillage machine (P5) and two passes of spading tillage machine (P6). Different implements have their own, i.e. different recommended speeds and depths of operation. For experimental study, two different depth of cut ranges, designated as D1 & D2 and two forward velocity ranges, designated as V1 & V2, suitable to every implement, were selected. The conventional tillage practices consumed more fuel and time as compared to multi-powered tillage tools practices but were found to move considerable volume of soil and shows lower rate of fuel consumption per unit of soil moved than other practices, whereas, rotavator and spading machine takes lesser time and fuel for tillage operation.","PeriodicalId":23030,"journal":{"name":"The Pharma Innovation Journal","volume":"119 1","pages":"254-258"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Pharma Innovation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22271/TPI.2021.V10.I4D.5936","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Tillage involves a lot of energy expenditure, generally in terms of fuel consumed by the tractor. The fuel consumption for the different tillage practices needs to be quantified and this paper presents quantification for the same. The experiment was carried out at the fields of two different soil types viz. sandy loam (S1) and silty loam (S2). Six tillage practices, designated as P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P6, were undertaken in the present study. The six practices were one pass of harrow-cultivator-planker combination (P1), two passes of harrow-cultivator-planker combinations (P2), one pass of rotavator (P3), two passes of rotavator (P4), one pass of spading tillage machine (P5) and two passes of spading tillage machine (P6). Different implements have their own, i.e. different recommended speeds and depths of operation. For experimental study, two different depth of cut ranges, designated as D1 & D2 and two forward velocity ranges, designated as V1 & V2, suitable to every implement, were selected. The conventional tillage practices consumed more fuel and time as compared to multi-powered tillage tools practices but were found to move considerable volume of soil and shows lower rate of fuel consumption per unit of soil moved than other practices, whereas, rotavator and spading machine takes lesser time and fuel for tillage operation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测量了在两种不同土壤类型中,在不同切割深度、不同耕作速度下的能量消耗
耕作涉及大量的能源消耗,通常是拖拉机消耗的燃料。不同耕作方式的燃料消耗需要量化,本文对不同耕作方式的燃料消耗进行了量化。试验在沙质壤土(S1)和粉质壤土(S2)两种不同土壤类型的田间进行。采用P1、P2、P3、P4、P5和P6 6种耕作方式。6种做法分别为:耙-耕-刨组合1次(P1)、耙-耕-刨组合2次(P2)、旋耕机1次(P3)、旋耕机2次(P4)、铲耕机1次(P5)、铲耕机2次(P6)。不同的工具有自己的,即不同的推荐速度和操作深度。在实验研究中,选取了适合于每种刀具的两个不同切割深度范围D1和D2,以及两个前进速度范围V1和V2。与多动力耕作工具相比,传统耕作方法消耗更多的燃料和时间,但被发现移动了相当大的土壤量,并且每单位土壤的燃料消耗率低于其他耕作方法,而旋转机和播种机在耕作操作中花费的时间和燃料更少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Colored grains: Chemistry, health benefits and processing Pasta: Raw materials, processing and quality improvement Honey crystallization: Mechanism, evaluation and application A comprehensive review on antinutritional factors of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Pattern of induced estrus during superovulatory programme in Kangayam donor cows
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1